Connor and Cosgrove and Ors (No. 2)
Case
•
[2018] FamCA 767
•26 September 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Connor and Cosgrove and Ors (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 767
[2018] FamCA 767
26 September 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter came before Hogan J of the Family Court of Australia concerning the property settlement between Mr Connor and Ms Cosgrove. The dispute involved the division of various assets, including superannuation interests, company shares, and interests in trusts, as well as the allocation of tax liabilities arising from their past business activities.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for the division of the parties' property, specifically addressing the allocation of Mr Connor's superannuation interest in J Super, the transfer of Ms Cosgrove's shares in B Pty Ltd, her resignation from offices within that company and associated trusts, and the indemnification of Ms Cosgrove for certain taxation liabilities. The court also needed to establish mechanisms to ensure the effective implementation of these orders, including provisions for default by either party.
Hogan J applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly sections 90MT and 106A, and the *Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2001* (Cth) to effect a superannuation splitting order. The court ordered that a base amount of $62,455.75 be allocated to Ms Cosgrove from Mr Connor's J Super interest, with specific provisions for the Trustee of J Super to pay splittable payments to Ms Cosgrove and make corresponding reductions to Mr Connor's entitlement. The court also ordered Ms Cosgrove to transfer her shares in B Pty Ltd to Mr Connor and resign from any associated company or trust offices, and Mr Connor to indemnify Ms Cosgrove for specific taxation liabilities. Provisions were made for a Registrar to sign documents and direct actions in the event of a party's default, and for the defaulting party to bear the costs of such default.
The final orders dismissed all otherwise pending applications. It was noted that the orders did not affect Mr Connor's liability for costs ordered on 5 April 2017 or any outstanding child support payments.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for the division of the parties' property, specifically addressing the allocation of Mr Connor's superannuation interest in J Super, the transfer of Ms Cosgrove's shares in B Pty Ltd, her resignation from offices within that company and associated trusts, and the indemnification of Ms Cosgrove for certain taxation liabilities. The court also needed to establish mechanisms to ensure the effective implementation of these orders, including provisions for default by either party.
Hogan J applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly sections 90MT and 106A, and the *Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2001* (Cth) to effect a superannuation splitting order. The court ordered that a base amount of $62,455.75 be allocated to Ms Cosgrove from Mr Connor's J Super interest, with specific provisions for the Trustee of J Super to pay splittable payments to Ms Cosgrove and make corresponding reductions to Mr Connor's entitlement. The court also ordered Ms Cosgrove to transfer her shares in B Pty Ltd to Mr Connor and resign from any associated company or trust offices, and Mr Connor to indemnify Ms Cosgrove for specific taxation liabilities. Provisions were made for a Registrar to sign documents and direct actions in the event of a party's default, and for the defaulting party to bear the costs of such default.
The final orders dismissed all otherwise pending applications. It was noted that the orders did not affect Mr Connor's liability for costs ordered on 5 April 2017 or any outstanding child support payments.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
2
Singer v Berghouse
[1994] HCA 40
Stanford v Stanford
[2012] HCA 52
Stanford v Stanford
[2012] HCA 52